Almost No Correlation Between Climate Models And Reality

By DemocracyRules

h/t Small Dead Animals

A new study has tested global warming climate models against reality.  It takes real data from the past, and tests climate models to see how well they fit the actual weather.

The study starts with two basic scientific principles. (1)  Every scientific theory must be testable.  There must be a way to show whether it is true or not.  For example, the notion that there are little green men living inside Jupiter is not a usable scientific theory.  Right now we have no way of testing whether it is true or not. 

(2) A climate model is essentially a theory.  Before scientists will accept that a certain climate model works, it has to disprove the Null Hypothesis.  The Null Hypothesis says the climate model is no better than chance in predicting future climate.  The inventor of each climate model has to show that his/her model can predict the future, and they must produce compelling evidence to prove it.

This new study goes on to examine six popular Climate Models, by looking at old temperature data from different locations on the planet.  Then they try predict the weather and climate using the models.  All the models failed completely.  They were no better than chance, and the correlation between their predictions and the real weather were almost zero.  This sample graph shows historical temperature data from Vancouver, Washington.  It compares the real temperatures (dark blue line) against three climate models.

“[M]odel outputs at annual and climatic (30 year) scales are irrelevant with reality; also, they do not reproduce the natural over year fluctuation ... none of the models proves to be systematically better than the others... The huge negative values of coefficients of efficiency at those scales show that model predictions are much poorer that an elementary prediction based on the time average... This makes future climate projections not credible.”

Well, the good news is that it's possible to test these 6 climate models against reality.  The bad news is that none of the six models fit reality.  None are better than a random guess about the future.  Al Gore and the IPCC, you're toast.

Pro Patria

________

Comments

[benning]

The bad news is that most American believe the Climate Models because the MSM touts them as accurate. The worse news is that Gore, et al, are still working to destroy Capitalism and the USA.

[DemocracyRules]

Benning: Thank you for your many useful comments! You always have an interesting take on things.

YES, the MSM keeps telling us that global warming is settled science. In fact, I have never seen a scientific theory sink so fast. (Hence my "hitting the iceberg" analogy). According to me, it will be up to people like us to point out the disaster in this theory, and we must do it collectively.

In 1970, "The Club of Rome" research group declared that "peak oil" was imminent, and the world would RUN OUT in 1992! The world now has more oil available than ever, but the public has never understood this. In this sense the "Club of Rome" were completely wrong, but they won in the media, and most people still believe in "peak oil".

I hope we can do a better job this time, in well and truly sinking the global warming myth, before the world wastes trillions of dollars on a useless piece of failed science.

Pro Patria

[Jordan 1]

And scientists concerned about climate change believe it will cause more drought in many areas in the future.